Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29199
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. SG-28890
 92-3-89-3-300
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition
 Referee William E. Fredenberger, Jr. when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (CSX Transportation, Inc. (former C60)

(a) Carrier violated the parties' Schedule Agreement, as amended, particularly the intent of Seniority Rule 33 and Awarding Positions Rule 52, when on April 18, 1988, Division Engineer Rahmes issued Award Bulletin No. SIGRI-88-1 A reading in pertinent part: ' . . . position of Signal Maintainer with headquarters at Sabot, VA is cancelled account of no qualified bidders.'

 (b) As a consequence of the above violation, Carrier should now be required to issue a correction to Richmond Seniority District Bulletin SIGRI88-1 A dated April 18, 1 Independently to D. M. Megginson, ID No. 619980, and pay Claimant Megginson the difference between Signalman/Signal Maintainer rate of pay of $14.13 per hour and the rate of ;,ay of Signal Maintainer Working Independently of $14.20 per hour, including all overtime accruing to the involved position.

 (c) Inasmuch as this is a continuing violation, said claim is to be retroactive 60 days from date of filing (May 9, 1988) and is to continue until such time as Carrier takes necessary corrective action to comply with violation cited in part (a) an 15-33 (88-40) G.C. File 88-25-CD.

 FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

 Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
 Form 1 Award No. 29199
 Page 2 Docket No. SG-28890
 92-3-89-3-300
 On March 14, 1988, the Carrier advertised the position of Independent
 Signal Maintainer headquartered at Sabot, Virginia. There were three appli
 cants for the position, including Claimant who under Agreement provisions was
 the senior applicant. By letter of April 18, 1988, the Carrier cancelled the
 advertisement asserting that there were no qualified bidders for the position.

 The Claim in this case was filed on May 9, 1988, and on July 13, 1989, the Carrier again advertised the position but the Claimant did not bid.

 The Claim was denied and the Organization appealed the denial to the highest officer of the Carrier designated to handle such disputes who also declined the Claim on the basis that Claimant was not qualified for the position. The Claim was then
Rule 25 of the Agreement provides in pertinent part that "[E[mployees assigned to or filling vacancies on Independent Signal Maintainer positions . . . will respond promptly when called." The Rule also provides that the incumbent of that position will be called first for work outside regularly assigned hours and contemplates that an employee generally will be available for such work. Claimant resided in Charlottesville, Virginia, 62 miles and one and one-half hours travel time from Sabot. Additionally, Claimant lived fifty-three miles from the west end of the territory and seventy-one miles from the east end. For that reason the Carrier refused to accept Claimant's bid for the position.

 In the final analysis, the record of handling on the property submitted to this Board by the parties as presented. It follows that the Claim in this case has no merit.






Attest:
        Nancy J. r - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7th day of May 1992.